The Rules

I. Definitions

2. Article - a piece of writing included with others in a newspaper, magazine, or other publication. (revised May 11, 2015)

3. Ban - a permanent removal of a user's ability to contribute to the wiki.

4. Block - a temporary suspension of a user's ability to contribute to the wiki.

5. Bureaucrat - any administrator of the wiki with bureaucratic privileges.

6. Compilation - a thing, especially a book, record, or broadcast program, that is put together by assembling previously separate items. (revised May 11, 2015)

7. Consensus – when 70% or more of the participants of a discussion are in favor of the proposal after seven (7) days or more of discussion. (revised April 28, 2015)

8. Content dispute - any disagreement in regards to content on the wiki.

9. Edit war - a dispute in which two or more editors revert changes to an article back and forth between opposing revisions.

10. Fanon - any SpongeBob SquarePants in-universe or merchandise-related content not officially released by Viacom via a press conference or the Nickelodeon TV channel, and information that can be derived from that.

11. List - a number of connected items or names written or printed consecutively, typically one below the other. (revised May 11, 2015)

1. Active User - any user in which one or more of the following applies:

a. Any user that has made over one hundred (100) contributions within one (1) month preceding the present date.

b. Any user that is actively involved in any of the ESB official discussions as well as any of the ESB official chatrooms, including ESB Chat and Skype (SpongeBobia Chatroom, ESB Administrators, ESB Bureaucrats, etc.). By actively involved, meaning participating in conversations on a regular basis.

2. Semi-Active User - any user in which both of the following applies:

a. Any user that has made between one (1) and ninety-nine (99) contributions within one (1) month preceding the present date.

b. Any user that is occasionally involved in ESB official discussions as well as any of the ESB official chatrooms, including ESB Chat and Skype (SpongeBobia Chatroom, ESB Administrators, ESB Bureaucrats, etc.). By occasionally involved, meaning participating in conversations on a not-so-much regular basis.

3. Inactive User - any user in which both of the following applies:

a. Any user that has made fewer than ninety-nine (99) contributions within one (1) month preceding the present date.

b. Any user that is rarely involved in ESB official discussions as well as any of the ESB official chatrooms, including ESB Chat and Skype (SpongeBobia Chatroom, ESB Administrators, ESB Bureaucrats, etc.). By rarely involved, meaning participating in conversations every once in a while.

4. Wikibreak - any promoted user taking an extended vacation or leave of absence lasting longer than three (3) weeks.

a. Wikibreaks have a maximum of three (3) months. At that time, if the promoted user fails to return, a bureaucrat must discuss their wikibreak status with them to determine if they are going to return or if a user rights review is in order.

b. If a promoted user makes more than five (5) edits within the first twenty-four hours of declaring a wikibreak, their wikibreak is rendered invalid.

c. After the first twenty-four (24) hours of a wikibreak, if the promoted user makes more than five (5) edits, their wikibreak is rendered invalid.

d. Any promoted user on wikibreak that becomes actively involved in any of the ESB official discussions as well as any of the ESB official chatrooms, including ESB Chat and Skype (SpongeBobia Chatroom, ESB Administrators, ESB Bureaucrats, etc.). By actively involved, meaning participating in conversations on a regular basis, their wikibreak is rendered invalid.

e. After three (3) invalid wikibreaks during a six (6) month period, a bureaucrat must initiate the user rights review process for that promoted user.

f. After three (3) valid wikibreaks during a one (1) year period, a bureaucrat must initiate the user rights review process for that promoted user.

II. User conduct

1. Do not attack other users personally. This includes but is not limited to: threatening the wiki and/or user(s), name calling (including, but not limited to idiot, jerk, stupid, retard, etc.), and derogatory statements.

2. Do not discriminate other users based on their religion, political affiliation, sexual preference, or anything else. It is strongly recommended that users do not discuss these things as these may cause distress.

3. Do not use profanity. You can say "damn" as it was used in the first movie, possibly "hell" if in the context. This also means no use of the words such as "f***," even when used as an expletive.

a. Any use of profanity in general will result in consequences.

b. Any use of profanity directly toward other users will result in a more severe consequence.

4. Do not add or link to content that is inappropriate for younger readers/contributors (someone that is under 8 years old.)

5. Do not correct other people's use of spelling and/or grammar on discussion pages, message walls, or the forums unless it is in regards to spelling and/or grammar use in an article.

1. Each user is only allowed one account, unless you have a good reason that can be approved by the administration. In that event, all users must identify themselves as the owner of the accounts on the user pages. Any other accounts that are not a user's primary account with the exception of bot accounts, will be blocked.

2. Only administrators may have a bot account. This account must be flagged after a discussion. Any exception to this rule requires a discussion.

III. Communication

1. Encyclopedia SpongeBobia is a community of multiple different users, and so the use of good communication is necessary to maintain a civil and productive editing environment.

2. Off topic discussions are allowed on the wiki and must be kept on the off topic forum. The administration reserves the right to remove off topic discussions they deem unnecessary.

3. If an administrator requests a response from a user regarding an issue, that user must acknowledge and respond to them. If the user makes more than twenty edits after the time of the administrator's message, this will be considered ignoring and consequences will follow.

4. Do not discuss another wiki's issues on this wiki, it is not the right place for them.

5. Do not necropost. Do not reply to forums threads, messages on other user's walls, or blog posts that haven't been replied to in three months or more without an administrator's permission.

2. They must create a request page using the associated form, ensuring they answer the questions and follow the proper requirements. There are no right or wrong answers, the questions are there to help the community make a decision.

3. The questions for all requests are as follows:

a. Why do you believe you are qualified to be promoted to this position?

b. Have you had experience with this position before?

c. What are your best contributions to Encyclopedia SpongeBobia and why?

d. How do you plan to use your rights if your request is successful?"

e. Have you been in a situation in which you needed the user rights for this position at that moment but were unable to act?

f. Is there anything else you want to add?

4. Applicants shall not use any images to advertise "support" for them, so as to discourage unqualified users who seek the support of others who do not consider their qualifications.

5. Applicants shall not force other users to support them. Applicants are allowed to notify other users of such discussion, without imposing an agenda (such as using images to advertise for support, as in clause 3, above).

6. Nominating another user for any position requiring a request form is prohibited unless the nominating user is an administrator or bureaucrat. All other nominations will be closed as invalid.

7. Administrator and bureaucrat requests can be posted on the forum to seek more input, and they can also be highlighted.

4. Voting

a. All users are welcome to participate in promotion discussions.

b. Any user who participates in such a discussion and is subsequently blocked, their vote will not count if they are still blocked at the point in which the request is closed.

c. Any requestee or nominee editing or removing votes from such a discussion will have their entire request or nomination invalidated and they are prohibited from making such a request for any position for thirty (30) days.

5. Length of request

a. Promotion requests are to last no shorter than seven (7) days from the time the applicant makes the request.

b. Some promotion requests may end early if one of the following criteria is met.

i. If an applicant has the support of at least 90% of participating administrators, they may be promoted after three (3) days.

ii. If more than half (50%) of active administrators do not support the user's application, the request is unsuccessful and may be closed.

iii. If a promotion request has 0% support from administrators after three (3) days, it may be closed early as unsuccessful.

6. Closing requests

a. Any applicant that has 70% support of all votes shall be promoted after the seven (7) days.

b. Only bureaucrats can close administrator requests, as they have the ability to promote those that are successful in their application.

c. If a user makes a promotion request but fails to be promoted, they must wait at least seven (7) days before making another request. Any bureaucrat can waive this rule by supporting the request.

7. Invalid requests

a. Anyone who makes a promotion request in which they leave any of the questions blank, must answer the questions within two (2) hours of the creation of their request or else the request will automatically be closed as invalid.

b. Anyone who makes a promotion request and does not meet the listed requirements, the request must be closed as invalid unless otherwise stated.

c. Any user that receives a valid block while having a pending promotion request, the request will automatically be closed as invalid. The user will be prohibited from making any request for thirty (30) days, starting the time their block ends. Any bureaucrat can waive this rule by supporting the request.

a. General requirements apply to promotion requests and those involved in the decision process determine whether or not the user meets the requirements per the success or failure of the request.

b. The user must demonstrate that all their contributions are positive, and further the goal of improving the wiki.

c. The user must demonstrate use of proper spelling and grammar.

d. The user must demonstrate that they can hold the position with maturity.

e. Any exceptions to these requirements may be waived by a unanimous vote of all bureaucrats.

2. Requirements for all positions

a. At least one (1) month must have passed since the user's first edit.

b. The user must have a clean block record for at least one (1) month.

c. The user must have support from a majority of all administrators.

d. The user must have support from a majority of all bureaucrats. If the request fails to do so, it requires 75% support of administrators who are not bureaucrats for the request to pass unless otherwise stated.

3. Moderator requirements

a. The user must be a current chat moderator for at least two (2) months.

b. The user must have at least one hundred (100) edits.

4. Assistant requirements

a. The user must have at least two hundred (200) edits, of which at least one hundred (100) are main namespace edits.

5. Administrator requirements

a. The user must be a current assistant for at least two (2) months.

b. The user must have at least 1,000 edits, of which at least five hundred (500) are main namespace edits.

c. The user must have a clean block record for at least three (3) months, not counting invalid blocks.

6. Bureaucrat requirements

a. The user must be a current administrator for at least two (2) years.

b. The user must have at least 2,000 edits, of which at least 1,000 are main namespace edits.

c. The user must have a clean block record for at least one (1) year, not counting invalid blocks.

d. The user must demonstrate good reasons for any questionable edits.

e. The user must have full support of all other active bureaucrats.

f. Any administrator requesting promotion to bureaucrat that does not meet the criteria outlined in clause a, above, may be waived if the request is supported by all other active bureaucrats and the requestor has been an active administrator for at least one (1) year.

VII. Demotion policy

1. All promoted users may keep their position as long as they want, with the exceptions outlined in this section.

2. Non-administrators who feel that a promoted user should be demoted for any reason can user the report user form and/or notify a bureaucrat, who can bring it up with other bureaucrats for a less public discussion.

a. A User Rights Review is a discussion for the community to review a promoted user's status, and whether or not that user should be blocked, suspended, demoted, etc.

b. Creating a User Rights Review discussion by any non-administrator to have another user demoted from any position is prohibited and will result in the deletion of that discussion.

2. Process (all of this was moved from below)

a. If a user feels that an administrator should be demoted for any reason, whether it is lack of activity, violation of policies, or behavior, they must contact a bureaucrat to make a request.

b. The bureaucrats will discuss whether or not the administrator in question should have a review discussion to let the community decide if that user should be demoted.

c. A majority of bureaucrats (more than 50%) must support a review discussion in order for it to be created in the first place. If it is determined that a majority of bureaucrats do not support such a discussion taking place, the request is dropped.

d. Once a majority of bureaucrats (more than 50%) support the creation of a review discussion, they must notify the administrator in question to give them the following choices:

i. Resign from the position. The bureaucrats can then decide if that user should remain as an assistant or not if the user in question chooses to resign.

ii. Write up a paragraph defending their keeping the position so that it can be presented before the demotion discussion begins. Once their defense has been submitted, the review discussion can be started immediately.

iii. If the user does neither of these, the review discussion will be posted three (3) days after the user in question is notified.

e. Once the review discussion is posted, it will be in the following format.

i. The bureaucrat will list all the bureaucrats who supported the creation of the discussion to show validation of the discussion.

ii. Each user will have the opportunity to voice their opinion on the matter, summing up on what should be done, whether it is a complete demotion, demotion to another position, suspension, block, and/or combination.

iii. After seven (7) days of discussion, the first stage will close. All listed options will be put up for a vote.

f. In order to terminate a bureaucrat or administrator, a majority of bureaucrats (50% or more) and more than 70% of administrators must support the termination in order for it to be valid. Only suspensions and blocks require 70% of all participants. The discussion must last no less than seven (7) days. The promoted user in question does not have a vote or is counted in the percentage for the decision but may make comments.

g. If the termination is successful, the terminated user cannot be repromoted unless they go through a successful request process.

h. If the termination is unsuccessful, another demotion discussion cannot take place until one (1) month after the close of the preceding demotion discussion.

1. When a promoted user is within 72 hours of becoming inactive, they shall be warned. If they do not edit within 72 hours after the warning, they will be demoted immediately at the discretion of a bureaucrat, unless otherwise stated.

2. If a promoted user goes on an extended vacation or leave of absence with intentions of returning, they may declare "wikibreak" status. See the article on definitions for wikibreak policies.

1. Administrators that find a user violating any of the policies must revert any changes and must politely notify the user of their wrongdoing by giving one (1) warning on their message wall.

2. If a user breaks two (2) different rules, that counts as one (1) warning for each rule. A user must break the same rule two (2) times before being blocked.

3. If a warned user continues to break the same rule within twenty-four (24) hours without acknowledging the warning, the administrator should try to contact that user again.

4. If the warned user continues to break the same rule for twenty-four (24) hours after the administrator have tried to contact them again, the user will be blocked for a maximum of fourteen (14) days.

5. Any user who continues to violate the rule for which they were blocked within seven (7) days after their initial block ends will receive further penalties, depending on the rule(s) violated and the severity of the offense.

6. The preceding clauses (1 through 5, above) are the blocking policy and must be followed, except for the clauses outlined in section C, "Exceptions," below.

1. Any user who makes any contributions that are very serious to the point in which they harm the wiki or threaten a user, they may be blocked immediately for any given amount of time at the discretion of the blocking administrator.

2. Any user who spams, vandalizes, harasses, or threatens as their first edit may automatically be blocked without warning. If they continue to spam and/or vandalize after their block, they shall be given an infinite block. They reserve the right to appeal a block, per the "appealing a block" section below.

3. This clause outlines items that are not block-worthy, and such are deemed "unfair."

a. Anyone who misspells a word or misuses grammar shall not be blocked.

b. Anyone who begins a page without proper formatting shall not be blocked.

1. When an administrator blocks a user, they must use the {{Blocked}} template on their message wall to notify that they have been blocked. This gives the blocked user a chance to find out they have been blocked and they can be easily linked to the policies as well as read the instructions to appeal a block.

2. Administrators must leave the user's message wall open in order for the blocked user to make an appeal case.

3. If a blocked user abuses their wall privileges by spamming, threatening, or harassing other users, before making an appeal case, they have forfeited their chance to make an appeal and can have their wall privileges removed until the end of their block.

4. If a user makes an appeal case, it must be posted to ESB:Block reviews and discussed there.

1. A block dispute occurs when any other user not including the blocked user oppose the administrator's actions in blocking a user.

2. All blocking disputes should be handled between the conflicting parties. If the conflicting parties resolve the dispute, the dispute is over.

3. If neither party agrees to a compromise, the user opposing the block must post to the ESB:Block reviews and follow the procedures.

4. A block must be overturned or changed if it receives 70% support.

5. Any blocking dispute involving an administrator may be considered an abuse of power and should be dealt with in the following manner.

a. If the blocking administrator is in the wrong following a block review, a majority (more than 50%) of all uninvolved bureaucrats must decide how to deal with the administrator.

b. If it is decided by the bureaucrats that the administrator needs a suspension from their adminship, the suspension shall last no longer than seven (7) days.

c. If the administrator receives a second suspension for misuse of the the blocking tool within six (6) months, a discussion shall be created to decided if they should keep their status as an administrator.

1. Users are permitted to have images in their signatures, or as their signature, so long as the height does not exceed 30 pixels. This includes animated signatures, but some may stop animating below a certain pixel size. Images over 30 pixels cause the spacing between two lines of text to be disproportionate, and animated signatures can result in longer load times for discussion pages. As a general guideline, however, please do not use images or font sizes that will interfere with the lines of text.

1. As said in the section above, signatures may not be more than 30 pixels high. This includes big font sizes, but also the length of a signature. A signature may not be so long that when viewed in the Wikia skin with the toolbar aside it, it is wider than one line. Also, signatures may not take up more than one line (any enters in the signature's code should be removed, as when it is used in an indented list (replies to others) it will break up the signature when there are enters in the code). The <noinclude> tag may be put around enters to make the code look cleaner, or <!-- and --> may be put around codes to prevent them from having such effects.

1. Names used in signatures must be consistent with the Wikia username. In order to prevent confusion, users should not use alternate names when signing edits. Names should at least be recognizable (e.g. User:RandomUser305 signing off as "RU305"), but not differ too greatly as to mistake the signature for a different user.

1. Any user involved in discussions that may have an elaborate signature which involves a lot of code is required to have a signature template to make it cleaner and also prevent problems with code change.

2. If a user is signing with such a signature, they should be notified and anyone can help them create their own signature template.

XI. Chat

2. No spamming. This includes blank messages, gibberish, and other examples listed here.

a. Do not make words by spreading them out into multiple messages.

b. Writing anything else that is spam can result in a kick or ban by the discretion of the banning moderator.

3. No chat flooding (coming in and out of chat). Anyone flooding chat shall be kicked. It is understandable if you have a bad connection, but note you may be kicked to stop the flooding. Anyone doing this on purpose shall be temporarily banned.

4. English is the preferred language in the chatroom. It is recommended to not use other languages. Using other languages to spam, troll, or to swear is not allowed.

5. No trolling.

a. If anyone is disturbing the chat room environment and not providing anything useful to the conversation which may be considered trolling, chat moderators and administrators can ban the user from chat immediately. Administrators can block them infinitely from ESB at their discretion if they feel the user does not provide any positive engagement to the community.

b. Anyone trolling will result in an immediate ban from chat. The administration may infinitely block the user from ESB.

6. Profanity

a. No profanity including use as an acronym or censored. (except for the words "damn" and "hell," which are allowed if they are used in context and not against another user)

b. Any use of profanity (except hell and damn) after a user is issued a warning will immediately result in a temporary ban from chat.

7. Be respectful toward all users, their views, and their opinions. Do not discriminate against or harass anyone. Doing so can result in a kick or ban by the discretion of the moderator.

8. Do not pose as a user of a higher power if you are not.

9. Do not post anything inappropriate or links to inappropriate sites. This includes links content not suitable for children under the age of 13, including sexual content. The chatroom is to remain clean.

11. If you are going to exchange social networking information, do it in a private message (such as Skype, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc.).

12. Do not argue or get into a heated debate. Friendly, civil debates are allowed.

13. No chat invasions, that is, inviting a large group to chat, normally to troll and/or spam.

14. ChatTags are also enabled on ESB's chatroom. You may have fun with them, but you may not misuse them. i.e., using colors for every message you send.

15. All moderator orders must be obeyed unless said otherwise by an administrator or someone of higher power.

16. Do not create drama.

17. Refrain from saying things that are not useful to the conversation and continue to interrupt those having a conversation. If more than one person is doing this, those people must take the conversation somewhere else.

18. Do not abuse the chatbot. It's okay to have a little fun with the chatbot sometimes, but if it gets excessive, a chat moderator can kick or ban you at their discretion.

1. All administrators and bureaucrats are chat moderators. A selected few chatters are granted chat moderator status because they are active in chat and trusted to keep the peace.

2. Do not kick or ban users for no reason.

3. Any abuse of chat moderator powers will result in immediate demotion. Any continued abuse may result in a block.

4. Chat moderators have no jurisdiction over what happens in a private message. If someone bothers you, ignore them. There is no definite way to prove what is in a private message.

5. There is a hierarchy in the chatroom. Chat Moderators are outranked by Moderators, Moderators are outranked by Administrators, and Administrators are outranked by Bureaucrats. Therefore, if a user is breaking a rule in chat, the users highest in command will deal with them. If they are unresponsive, the responsibility goes down the chain of hierarchy.

XII. Content dispute

1. This article will outline the proper procedures in the event of an edit war and/or relating to content dispute.

B. Dispute

1. General

a. Not everyone will agree on how things should be done on the wiki. However, in order to have consistency and organization within the wiki, it is important to establish policies and formatting guidelines for everyone to follow in which the community agrees upon.

b. As this is a collaborative environment, it is important to resolve disputes by using communication to address the problem instead of ignoring the problem.

C. Procedures

1. Edit war

a. When an edit war occurs, all parties must stop editing the article and take the problem to an informal discussion on one of the editor's message walls or in a forum post and explain their reasons for their edits.

b. Once they have explained their reasons, they must follow the procedures below to resolve the dispute.

2. Procedures

a. If an established policy and/or guideline can resolve the dispute, that policy and/or guideline must be followed.

b. If there is disagreement in regards to the policy and/or guideline, discussion is allowed, but the reverts must be halted so that the disputed content on the article is left alone until the dispute is resolved.

c. If the dispute is not resolved in clause 2b, above, an uninvolved administrator must step in to mediate the discussion.

d. If the dispute involves one (1) or more administrators, a bureaucrat uninvolved in the edit war must intervene.

e. If all bureaucrats are involved in the edit war, an official discussion is required.

f. In the event that no such policy and/or guideline exists to establish a resolution policy-wise, the dispute may require further discussion that will ultimately be decided in an official discussion to establish a policy and/or guideline.

3. Conclusion

a. Once the dispute is resolved, the decision is final. Any edit made by the losing party in the dispute that blatantly ignores the decision is subject to a maximum three (3) day block.

b. If any user is in disagreement over the decision, they are free to make a petition to change the guidelines/policies/rules/etc.

D. 3 Revert Clause

1. General

a. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as an edit-warring violation.

2. Exceptions

a. Reverting your own actions ("self-reverting").

b. Reverting edits to pages in your own user space, so long as you are respecting the user page guidelines.

c. Reverting actions performed by banned users, and sockpuppets of banned and blocked users.

d. Reverting obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding offensive language.

e. Removal of clear copyright violations and any illegal content.

3. After 3 reverts

a. During an edit war, when a page is reverted after three (3) times by the same user, the editing must stop and be reported to an administrator.

b. If an administrator is involved in the edit war, the following procedures must be followed:

i. The article must be protected by any administrator and no further reverts made in regards to the disputed content.

ii. An uninvolved bureaucrat must intervene to mediate the dispute.

iii. All succeeding procedures are outlined in the "dispute" section C2 of this article.

c. If the edit war continues after a user has made 3 reverts, the following must be followed:

i. Dispute between non-administrators

1. At this point, the page should have been protected by an administrator and the edit war should have stopped.

ii. Dispute between non-administrators and administrators in which the administrators are in agreement.

1. At this point, the page should have been protected by an administrator and the edit war should have stopped.

iii. Dispute between non-administrators and administrators in which the administrators are in disagreement.

1. It is expected that the dispute between administrators be resolved by discussion and that the edit war does not continue.

2. Any such violation of this requires an informal discussion to the matter or an official discussion if the matter is serious.

iv. Dispute between only administrators in which the administrators are in disagreement.

1. It is expected that the dispute between administrators be resolved by discussion and that the edit war does not continue.

2. Any such violation of this requires an informal discussion to the matter or an official discussion if the matter is serious.